Intermediaries in the Medicare Market

Last registered on October 14, 2024

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Intermediaries in the Medicare Market
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0014329
Initial registration date
September 11, 2024

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
September 17, 2024, 11:51 AM EDT

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Last updated
October 14, 2024, 4:54 PM EDT

Last updated is the most recent time when changes to the trial's registration were published.

Locations

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
UC Berkeley

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
UC Berkeley

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2024-10-16
End date
2026-03-31
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
This study seeks to understand the role of intermediaries in the Medicare market. Specifically, we investigate how quality of insurance advice is correlated with consumer and agent characteristics.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Kallus, Margaret and Elaine Shen. 2024. "Intermediaries in the Medicare Market." AEA RCT Registry. October 14. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.14329-3.0
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Intervention Start Date
2024-10-16
Intervention End Date
2026-03-31

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
The key outcome of interest is the quality of the insurance plan recommendation from an insurance producer (or insurance agent). Our primary outcome evaluates the quality of an agent's recommendation against what a fully-informed expert would recommend. We are primarily interested in the heterogeneity in recommendations and response rates by insurance agent characteristics based on publicly available data and randomly assigned consumer characteristics such as gender and age. Finally, we test whether randomly assigning consumers to signal that they are soliciting and comparing multiple recommendations improves the quality of agent recommendations.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
Insurance agent characteristics we focus on include number of appointments, firm affiliation, number of states licensed in, tenure, and advertising presence. We will also use text analysis from recordings to study variations in the language used by caller/consumer and insurance producer characteristics. We measure recommendation quality as whether or not the agent recommends Medicare Advantage, the average plan price of the recommendation, and the agent’s accuracy when answering factual questions.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
We will also look at the number of incorrect/misleading statements an agent makes as a measure of recommendation quality. Our primary outcome looks at the quality of the agent's recommendation against an expert benchmark, but we also use consumer choice, other agent recommendations, and random choice as benchmarks. We will also look at the impact of state-level differences in the regulatory and market environment.
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
We will conduct a correspondence study that randomly assigns caller and client characteristics to a randomly selected group of insurance agents. To identify insurance agents, we will assemble a list of the most common insurance agents that appear from Google and other public recommendation lists (including government databases, industry affiliation lists, social media websites, and business review and consumer recommendation websites). We will conduct these searches from multiple IP addresses. We will also use text analysis from recordings to study variations in the language used by caller/consumer and insurance producer characteristics.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Consumers will be randomly assigned to insurance producers by a computer.
Randomization Unit
Consumers will be randomly assigned to insurance agents (and therefore insurance agent characteristics) by a computer at the individual level. Variation in competition signaling and consumer characteristics such as gender and age will also be randomly assigned.
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
We will collect approximately 400-800 observations, depending on our ability to obtain additional funding and when our current sources of research funding run out. We will exclude incomplete observations, off-topic observations, and responses from individuals who are not licensed insurance producers. (Complete responses from individuals who are not licensed can be reported separately.) We anticipate having funding for a minimum of 400 observations, however there is a chance we will have fewer than 400 observations if response rates are lower than expected or if several observations do not meet our screening criteria.
Sample size: planned number of observations
We will collect approximately 400-800 observations, depending on our ability to obtain additional funding and when our current sources of research funding run out. We will exclude incomplete observations, off-topic observations, and responses from individuals who are not licensed (complete responses from individuals who are not licensed can be reported separately). We anticipate having funding for a minimum of 400 observations, however there is a chance we will have fewer than 400 observations if response rates are lower than expected or if several observations do not meet our screening criteria. The maximum number of observations will also depend on take-up, screening, and whether we are able to obtain additional funding.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
We will aim to have a 50/50 balance of the main agent and consumer characteristics of interest (e.g. the gender and age of the consumers) and whether or not consumers signal competition. We do not expect the sample to be perfectly balanced due to anticipated differences in response rates among agents and because the randomization does not ensure exact balance by insurance agent characteristics such as number of states licensed in, number of appointments, etc.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
UC Berkeley Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects
IRB Approval Date
2024-05-22
IRB Approval Number
2024-04-17373